Survival Tips for Oscar Newbies

First-time nominees have plenty to think about.

By Timothy Gray, Variety.com
Thurs., Feb. 18, 2010

Academy Awards are being presented at the Kodak Theater March 7. To those who have already attended, no explanation is necessary.

To those who have never been there, no explanation is possible.Still, that doesn't deter me. Here is some handy advice for nominees, particularly first-timers:

• Bring a snack: You leave the house at 2:30 p.m. and it's seven hours before you get a meal. Protein bars and trail mix are dandy little sources of brain food. And avoid the booze. Believe me, if you win, you don't want to be light-headed.

• Make things easy for security: If you're bringing your own car, just be aware that security people are very democratic, and scan all cars equally. In other words, clean out your trunk.

• Keep breathing: Breathe in through the nose, out through the mouth. Concentrate on those breaths. It sounds obvious, but it can be deeply calming during moments of stress.

• Bring lozenges: If your throat gets dry, suck on a Halls or an Altoid. In theory, you could drink a lot of water, but that leads to other complications (lines to the loo during commercial breaks can be daunting). But don't chew gum. Gum is fine for Lakers games, but it's amazing how all that carefully chosen black-tie finery is undercut if the camera catches you lost in thought, chewing on your Wrigley's.

• Prepare a speech: Ingrid Bergman, Sally Field and Cuba Gooding Jr. made memorable acceptance speeches that seemed totally spontaneous. That's three people in 81 years. Most of us have forgotten (or happily repressed) the many other folks who've clambered to the stage and given rambling, stream-of-consciousness speeches because they hadn't prepared anything ("I didn't think I would win!").

• Prepare a speech: In other words, no laundry lists. It's boring. It's also self-destructive: If you rattle off 30 names, there will still be No. 31 and 32 who feel slighted. At Monday's Oscar nominees luncheon, Bill Mechanic, one of the show's producers, warned against such a recitation, "It is the single-most hated thing on the show." Second, if you've won awards this season, try to come up with a different speech for the Oscars. Many have lamented the fact that Oscar's TV ratings have never equalled the "Titanic" levels during the past dozen years. But is it just the lineup of contenders, or is it the speeches?

When viewers have seen a star rattle off the same litany of thanks at the Broadcast Critics, the Globes, the BAFTAs and the SAG Awards, who wants to watch it again? So this year, nominees, you can start a precedent: A new speech for each kudocast. Talk about what it's like to work in your field, give an inspiring thought to young folks, say what it means to be recognized after such a long (or relatively brief) career, or thank the one person who changed your career (a parent, a teacher, a mentor). Espouse a cause. Please, please. I don't ask you for many favors, but please grant me just this one.

• Keep perspective: Some years ago, I was nominated for a journalism award. Frankly, I'd never heard of these particular awards, nor the org that was handing them out. So I was pleased but detached. However, once I arrived at the ceremonies, the chatter was all about the awards, the awards, the awards, so by the time my category arrived, my heart was pounding out of my chest. I had gone past "I want to win" to "I MUST win!" I didn't. I was crestfallen. My whole world had collapsed. The next morning, I woke up mystified: I wasn't sure how I'd gone from flattered indifference to this. Was I nuts? And the answer is: Yes, I was.

Awards have a way of undoing all sense of logic and priorities (i.e., they have ways of messin' with your head, to borrow a phrase from my youth). So go on March 7 and have fun, enjoy the achievement, but try to keep things in perspective.

Christopher Nolan, the Savior of Superman?

Can the Batman filmmaker whip the Man of Steel into shape?

By Joey Esposito, Crave.com
Feb 15, 2010

Last week, DC Entertainment made the announcement that Batman Begins and The Dark Knight director Christopher Nolan will be "mentoring" the latest iteration of Superman on the big screen. Coupled with the fact that after the immaculate success of The Dark Knight in 2008 Warner Brothers execs publicly spoke about giving all of DC's slated film projects a "mature" and "darker" edge, the involvement of Nolan in a new Superman movie begs the question: will it be true to the source material?

It's important to note that no one knows what the hell "mentoring" a film means. Is Nolan going to take the movie to the Boys & Girl Club and play basketball with it? Are the credits going to read "Big Brother - Christopher Nolan"? For all we know, Nolan is going to help find a director and then never give it a second thought. The point is, all we can really do at this stage is speculate. So gladly, I'll add some fuel to the fire.

Nolan has said more than once that his world in the new Batman films has no place for characters like Robin, let alone superpowered heroes. A lot of fans seem to be assuming that this move by DC Entertainment is an effort to begin constructing a cohesive film universe, like Marvel is doing with their big screen properties. I'm not sure if that's the case or not, but I think it's important to consider the new restructuring over at DC Entertainment. The purpose of the new system was to couple filmmakers with key DC creators to keep the films true to their source while being the best movie it can be.

That said, anyone that has fears of Nolan turning Superman into a character that lives in the shadows can rest easy. Firstly, I think Nolan has enough common sense to stay true to the character, whether he's a comic book fan or not. And, if for some reason he tried to go against the grain, the structure of DC Entertainment, as its intended to do, would prevent the defacing of its character. Of course, this assumes that the promises spit out by DC/Warner Brothers isn't a cloud of smoke to reassure fans.

What Nolan did so well in Begins and The Dark Knight is spotlight the humanity of the Bruce Wayne/Batman character. Surely, finding the humanity in Superman would make fans rejoice. But guess what? Finding humanity in Superman is exactly what Bryan Singer accomplished in Superman Returns and fanboys cried to their message board faux-friends in peril. I can understand the movie not being a commercial success considering its outrageous budget, but there was drama and humanity coupled with a lot of other perks: throwbacks to the original films, a new twist on the typical Superman/Lois relationship, and humor. There were glaring problems, but overall not a bad addition to Kal-El's filmic history.

Fans may point out that Nolan did a great job of combining action and drama in The Dark Knight, but that brings the issue back around to what exactly Nolan's role in the film is. He's not directing, so really, how much influence will he have in the specifics? He may assist in general tone or plot, but as far as the dynamics of the film and its pacing, I doubt he'll have little interest.

As I said, all we can do at this point is speculate. And my own, personal speculation is that Nolan's "involvement" is essentially a jumpstart for the long problematic Superman movie franchise. I assume that Nolan will help get the production back on its feet (ie, not wading in an endless stationary pool of rumors), get it rolling with the right people, and then back off. Time will tell, but in the meantime, let the furious Internet debates begin.

Week 3: Road Films

CHE
Even though we are too insignificant to be
spokesmen for such a noble cause, we believe, and
this journey has only confirmed this belief, that the
division of American into unstable and illusory nations is
a complete fiction. We are one single mestizo race from
Mexico to the Magellan Straits. And so, in an attempt to
free ourselvesfrom narrow minded provincialism, I
propose a toast to Peru and to a united America.

—Gael García Bernal as Che Guevarra in
Diarios de motocicleta (The Motorcycle Diaries)
(Salles, 2004 Argentina/US/et al.)

M 2.15/W 2.17: WGHS Winter Break
NO CLASS

Upcoming:

M 2.22/W 2.24: Road Films
In-class: “An Introduction to Road Films, Pt. II”
Screening: Thelma & Louise (Scott, 1991 USA)
Due: OSR 2 (1940-1959)

The Female-driven Blockbuster is on the Rise

With exception of ‘Avatar,’ all recent box-office toppers are chick flicks.

By Daniel Frankel, TheWrap.com

Feb. 10, 2010

Thirteen years before “Dear John” opened to $32.6 million, the New York Times concluded that women had suddenly become a powerful force at the box office. The male studio executives responded as only male studio executives knew how.

“The aim is to do action films that are more women-friendly, that is, having strong women in top roles and taking out a lot of the violence,” chimed then-Fox chairman Bill Mechanic, specifically noting the inclusion of Sandra Bullock in the “Speed” franchise.

While women were merely being invited onto Bullock’s blockbuster bus back in those days, they seem to be driving it now. And not just as male-action-hero stand-ins.

Indeed, the lightly regarded chick flick seems to have given way to a new box-office force: the female-driven tentpole.

Sony/Screen Gems’ “Dear John," which drew an audience last weekend that was 84 percent female -- and 64 percent below age 25 -- is but one example of a major box-office hit fueled almost entirely by women.

The female-driven movie isn’t a new phenomenon. But going back to mid-November -- and also factoring in Summit’s mega-hit “Twilight Saga: New Moon” (which opened to an audience that was 80 percent female) and Warner’s older skewing “The Blind Side” (60 percent female) -- every No. 1 film at the domestic box office not called “Avatar” has been chick movie.

Also performing strongly: Universal’s Nancy Meyers rom-com “It’s Complicated,” which grossed $176 million worldwide under “Avatar’s” shadow.

Meanwhile, Paramount’s Peter Jackson film “The Lovely Bones” was dead in the water until the studio figured out how to recast its marketing toward young women. Finally opening wide in early January to an audience that was 72 percent female and 40 percent under the age of 20, the $65 million film now at least has a remote shot at recouping its $65 million production budget.

In fact, “New Moon” and “Blind Side” only closed out what was an estrogen-fueled year at the box office, with stars like Sandra Bullock and Meryl Streep outperforming their A-list male counterparts in terms of theatrical revenue.

And from Disney’s “The Proposal” (with an audience that was 63 percent female) to Sony’s “Julie and Julia” (67 percent women), studios didn’t just release successful movies with a narrow audience-composition edge favoring women, like, say, “Titanic."

These were hits driven almost entirely by female audience members.

And it's not that there is some big new trend of more women going to the movies. Rather, said Vinny Bruzzese, executive vice president of the motion-picture group for research firm OTX, the over-performance among women for certain films shows that “studios are catching on that you have to make the movie for someone. Movies that are for a specific audience tend to overperform.”

Martha Lauzen, executive director of the Center for the Study of Women in Television and Film at San Diego State University, concurred. “Women are just as likely to go to the movies as men,” she told CNN, right after the huge premiere of “The Blind Side.” Instead, she noted, studios are making more movies now that accurately reflect women’s experiences and interests.

Even misfires aren’t costly
And the studios executives are often more surpised than anyone with the results.

In 2004, New Line adapted Nicholas Sparks’ best-seller “The Notebook” into a sleeper hit that opened to $13.5 million.

The next Sparks adaptation, “Dear John,” outperformed the most optimistic pre-release estimates by over $7 million last weekend -- more than doubling “The Notebook’s” opening in the process.

“It’s hard to wrap your head around this, because it’s never happened before,” Sony distribution president Rory Bruer told TheWrap.

Of course, narrowly targeting the female audience quadrants doesn’t guarantee success. In mid-January, Universal tried to counter-program a box office full of male-driven hits (“Avatar” specifically) with the Amy Adams-led romantic comedy “Leap Year.” The film made only $25.4 million. Likewise, Disney endured similarly middling results ($21.3 million) with the Kristen Bell rom-com “When in Rome” two weeks later.

But these were hardly costly misfires -- “Leap Year,” for example, costs only $19 million to make. And on the upside, Relativity Media said it paid only $25 million to fully finance “Dear John.”

In fact, grossing $704.7 million worldwide on a production budget of just $50 million, “Twilight Saga: New Moon’s” profitability actually surpassed the two male-driven tentpoles that ranked ahead of it in 2009, “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince”($934 million in global box office on a production budget of $250 million) and “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” ($836.3 million/$200 million).

Certainly, with Summit ready to debut the next “Twilight” this spring, as well as another Robert Pattinson drama, “Remember Me,” on March 12, the female-driven tentpole might become even more ubiquitous in 2010. This isn't even accounting for Warner's upcoming follow-up to "Sex and the City," which grossed $415.3 million on a production budget of just $65 million two years ago.

“It’s getting all those young girls Tweeting and telling their friends how good the movie is,” noted Relativity marketing chief Geoffrey Ammer, following “Dear John’s” big score over the weekend. “That’s the key.”

'Avatar' Ends Impressive Seven-Week Box-Office Reign

Pandora finally met its match with 'Dear John,' but we take a look back at its weeks at #1.

By Eric Ditzian, MTV.com
02.08.10

It had to happen sometime. After Mel Gibson, Denzel Washington, Dwayne Johnson and a handful of other Hollywood heavyweights couldn't take down "Avatar" at the box office, two rising stars stepped in to conquer Pandora: Channing Tatum and Amanda Seyfried of "Dear John."

As we welcome a new film into the top weekend spot for the first time since mid-December, it's worth taking a look back at the record-breaking reign of Cameron's alien epic.

Weekend One
As a blizzard locked down much of the Northeast in an icy mess, "Avatar" got off to an impressive but not record-shattering start, collecting $77 million in its first three days in theaters after its December 18 release. It didn't have much in the way of competition: the number two slot went to holdover "The Princess and the Frog" and its $12 million haul. At this point, no one — not even James Cameron — thought "Avatar" would hold the #1 spot for another six weeks.

Weekend Two
Despite the arrival of two significant rivals — "Sherlock Holmes" and "Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel" — "Avatar" dropped just 1.8 percent in B.O. dollars from its first weekend to its second, the 10th-smallest drop since 1982. Blockbusters can typically fall as much as 60 percent in their second weekend. With $212 million in total domestic business and another holiday weekend in front of it, "Avatar" was well positioned to continue its successful run.

Weekend Three
Could "Avatar" beat out "Titanic" to become the all-time B.O. champ? It wasn't until the new year that the topic was raised with any seriousness. The film's third weekend suggested it might. Dropping only 9.7 percent, "Avatar" crossed the $350 million plateau, moving into second place on the 2009 list behind "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen." With its premium IMAX and 3-D ticket prices, positive word of mouth and lack of serious theatrical competition throughout January, "Avatar" seemed at least guaranteed to challenge "Titanic," if not overtake it.

Weekend Four
Before the weekend even began, "Avatar" established itself as the #2 all-time record holder, with over $1.1 billion in worldwide sales. Its $50 million domestic weekend total again beat out "Sherlock" and "Chipmunks." The closest opening-weekend competition came from "Daybreakers" with $15 million. After dropping 26 percent in weekend four, could it keep the fifth-weekend drop to a reasonable number?

Weekend Five
The answer was yes. A drop of just 15 percent gave "Avatar" $43 million for a domestic total of $493 million. Not even a very respectable $33 million haul by Denzel Washington's "The Book of Eli" stood a chance. When you factor in the Martin Luther King holiday, "Avatar" walked away with $54 million. Across the country, IMAX showings were still routinely selling out, and "Avatar" was poised to continue its B.O. dominance. By Sunday, it stood as the fourth-biggest movie domestically, fast on the heels of "The Dark Knight."

Weekend Six
For the second weekend in a row, "Avatar" dropped a smaller percentage than it had in weekend four, securing $35 million after an 18 percent drop. By comparison, "Titanic" pulled in $25 million in its sixth week of release (down 16 percent) for a total of $275 million. With $552 in total domestic sales for "Avatar," the question was not if it would unseat "Titanic," but when.

Weekend Seven
The weekend had not even started before "Avatar" became the top worldwide B.O. earner with $1.858 billion. Come Friday, it had no problem dispatching Mel Gibson and "Edge of Darkness," reeling in $31 million (dropping 11 percent). Days later "Avatar" dispatched "Titanic" to become the top domestic flick in history.

Weekend Eight
But the magic could only last for so long. Facing off against Channing Tatum — who won big at the box office last year with "G.I. Joe: The Rise of the Cobra" — and "Dear John," "Avatar" fell nearly 25 percent for a weekend total of $24 million. Finally, the country had a new #1.

Week 2: Road Films

ED
Now, I owe it to myself to tell you, Mr. Griswold,
that if you are thinking of taking the tribe cross country,
this is your automobile: The Wagon Queen Family Truckster.
You think you hate it now, but wait till you drive it.

—Eugene Levy as Ed
in Vacation (Ramis, 1983 USA)

M 2.8/W 2.10: Road Films
In-class: “An Introduction to Road Films, Pt. I”
Screening: It Happened One Night (Capra, 1934 USA)
Due: OSR 1 (Silent Era to 1939)

Upcoming:

M 2.15/W 2.17: WGHS Winter Break
NO CLASS

Road Movies, 1980 to Present

Trailer for The Cannonball Run (Needham, 1980 USA)


Scene from Stand By Me (Reiner, 1986 USA)


Trailer for Midnight Run (Brest, 1988 USA)


Trailer for My Own Private Idaho (Van Sant, 1991 USA)


Trailer for Kalifornia (Sena, 1993 USA)


Trailer for Tommy Boy (Segal, 1995 USA)


Trailer for To Wong Foo Thanks for Everything, Julie Newmar (Kidron, 1995 USA)


Scene from Almost Famous (Crowe, 2000 USA)


Scene from Road Trip (Phillips, 2000 USA)


Trailer for Sideways (Payne, 2004 USA)


Trailer for Diarios de motocicleta (The Motorcycle Diaries) (Salles, 2004 Argentina/US/et al.)



Trailer for The Road (Hillcoat, 2009 USA)